Agendas and Minutes

Regular Meeting

MinutesThursday, September 02, 2004

Please title this page. (Page 1)

Charter Review Committee

September 2, 2004

Regular Meeting Minutes

Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street

I. CALL TO ORDER: Chair John Enders called the Ashland Charter Review Committee
meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. on September 2, 2004 in the Civic Center Council
Chambers, 1175 E Main Street, Ashland, Oregon.

Chair John Enders introduced Thomas Sponsor of Beery, Elsner and Hammond
LLP. Sponsler, a graduate of Willamette Law School with 25 years of experience
in city and county government, presented an overview of the City's current
charter. The presentation included an introduction to charters, legal structure,
political issues, practical considerations, possible next steps and his
recommendation to the committee. Sponsler summarized the amendments to the
1970 Ashland Charter and noted that Ashland's charter is approximately four
times as long as the model charter. His legal observations were that the
current charter contained outdated provisions, provisions currently covered
by state law, some provisions would serve better as ordinances and noted
that the charter's government structure (Mayor as executive officer) is not
the current one being practiced (City Manager as executive officer). He
recommended a city charter be readable, concise, logical, well organized
and consistent. He recommended either fixing the current charter or using
the Model charter as a framework to build upon.

III. QUESTIONS FROM COMMITTEE

Enders thought perhaps authors of the 1970 Charter intended to maximize legal
authority. He was curious about their intent. Massie asked if city councils
are typically open to adopting ordinances removed from the charter. Sponsler
said, in his experience, they were and recommended the committee draft the
ordinances or make a list of recommended ordinances. Riedeman asked about
election ordinances. Sponsler noted that only the nomination process could
be regulated by cities the election process itself is regulated by state
law.

Bashaw wondered if both a mayor and city administrator could share administrative
duties. Sponsor thought it difficult to find a mayor with the required skill
set.

Enders asked the most common form of government. Sponsor replied the "City
Manager" form of government. The advantage is that a manager's responsibilities
are spelled out in the charter. A mayor's role would include leading the
city council and setting policy. He believed Ashland's current charter grant
the mayor "paper" authority only and no voting rights.

Massie wondered if Sponsler's sample timeline for a March election was realistic.
Sponsler thought it unlikely, but perhaps May depending upon the number of
divisive issues.

Cloer was concerned about public acceptance of a revised city charter and
wondered if a county review process differed. Sponsler said counties are
unique in the large number of elected officials and their history of being
regulated by the state. County charters are more difficult to pass. Bashaw
wondered if voters are generally against removing the right to elect a public
official. Sponsler said it depended upon the reasoning behind the provision.
Sponsler recommended adapting the model charter. If provisions don't fit
for Ashland, ask for public input. He noted four types of revisions 1) simple
housecleaning; 2) common sense changes; 3) revisions requiring public input;
and 4) "hot button" issues that may require a split election.

Massie would like to have outdated provisions, provisions covered by state
law and provisions that would better serve as an ordinance outlined in the
current charter. Sponsler noted that this would be time consuming and expensive
to the committee. He recommended using the Charter Edit Worksheet he distributed
to the committee.

VI. QUESTIONS FROM AUDIENCE

Bryan Holley, 324 Liberty, a member of the Tree Commission and ad hoc member
of the Citizens for Responsible Government, asked if shifting language from
the charter to an ordinance was practical. Sponsler said it was fairly
straightforward and suggested making it mandatory within the language of
the ballot measure. A city council should be in agreement beforehand.

Franell added that in many instances state law or the city administrator
would fill the gaps left by removing charter provisions. A voter initiative
could cover contingencies (e.g. the relationship between the City and the
hospital, the City Band).

Susan Rust, 42 N Wightman, noted the current survey on the City website.
She asked for suggestions educating the public. Sponsler recommended extensive
press coverage, getting the League of Women Voters involved and presentations
to community groups. He noted that typically small communities are more
politically involved.

Marsh estimated six to eight controversial issues and wondered about the
risk of placing such issues on the ballot. Marsh wondered if brevity increased
the risk of failure. Sponsler noted that most citizens appreciate brevity.
An important part of building public trust is consensus among Charter Review
Committee members and the most successful charter revisions are those in
which the public, in general, trusts the charter review commission. Cloer
asked about holding two elections, one for simple changes and one that would
require an active campaign. Sponsler noted a disadvantage in that certain
provisions may not be safeguarded until the second election.

McGraw wondered if city councils have been known to deny charter review committee
recommendations. Sponsler said no. Although they may not like the
recommendations, charter review committees are independent and ad hoc.

City Councilor Cate Hartzell recommended extensive public involvement before
the committee attempted to reach a consensus. Enders replied that this issue
was considered and approved at the last meeting.

Enders thanked Sponsler and asked committee members to begin filling out
the Charter Edit Worksheet. Marsh would also list political and policy issues
she believed would require public input.

VI.NEXT MEETING

The next regular meeting of the Charter Review Committee is set for Thursday,
September 16th beginning at 7:00 p.m. Former Mayor Cathy Shaw was scheduled
to make a short presentation.